The attention of the world press, riveted to the Bolshoi Theater after the attack on the artistic director of the ballet troupe Sergei Filin, became even more intense at the end of January. However, this time the focus was on the prima ballerina of the Bolshoi Theater Svetlana Lunkina, who has been in Canada for half a year. The world-famous dancer said she was afraid to return to Russia because of the threats coming from the fund of parodist Vladimir Vinokur, her husband's former partner, producer Vladislav Moskalev. The conflict between them flared up over money, while Lunkina's attitude to the dispute is rather indirect.
Svetlana Lunkina is a prima ballerina of the Bolshoi Theater who joined its troupe in 1997 immediately after graduating from the Moscow State Academy of Choreography. One of the most gifted ballerinas of her generation, she has gone on to an international career, performing at the Paris National Opera, the Berlin State Opera, touring and receiving excellent reviews. Her career at the Bolshoi began for her with Giselle, and although Lunkina gained fame as a classical lyrical ballerina, she showed that she also feels great in avant-garde productions, such as the ballet "Chroma" by Briton Wayne McGregor.
For the current season, Lunkina had many plans related to the Bolshoi Theater, but on January 28, the ballerina gave an interview to the Izvestia newspaper, where she said that she was afraid to come to Russia because of threats from representatives of the Vinokur Foundation, blackmail and hacking of personal pages on the Internet . Moreover, from friends in the theater, she learned that Filin allegedly no longer wants to see her in the Bolshoi Theater.
The repetition of the situation with threats involuntarily puts the story of Lunkina on a par with the life of the artistic director of the theater, who was also threatened at first, and on January 17 they splashed acid in the face. However, unlike the attack on Filin, the nature of the conflict that has arisen around the ballerina is known and lies in the financial plane. It is quite possible that the stories are in no way connected, just as the ballerina herself is not inclined to connect them, but are simply pulled out one after another against the backdrop of an information wave.
Photo: Yury Martyanov / Kommersant, archive
The claims that Lunkina speaks about are, first of all, made not to her, but to her husband Moskalev, a well-known producer, organizer of many ballet shows. Moskalev and the Vladimir Vinokur Foundation, who have collaborated for many years on the project “Kremlin Gala. Stars of the 21st century”, began to work together on a film about the Russian ballerina Matilda Kshesinskaya. Back in June 2012, Moskalev, in an interview with the same Izvestia, said that casting was underway, the script for the film was written by Paul Schrader, and Alexei Uchitel would shoot it.
But then disagreements arose between the partners, since the Teacher rejected Schrader's script (not the first by that time), Moskalev offered to replace the Teacher, but Vinokur did not go for it. Soon Moskalev left the project, and the artist's fund presented him with financial claims for $ 3.7 million, which Lunkina's husband did not accept. From that moment on, the ballerina and her husband, according to them, began to receive threats demanding to pay money, otherwise they were promised to arrange an information attack, send copies of the statements of claim, not only to the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Prosecutor General's Office, but also to all the largest theaters in the world. Which, perhaps, was done. In the letters sent to the theaters, Lunkina is mentioned indirectly - "with the help of his wife" Moskalev allegedly legalized part of the funds stolen from the fund.
The press service of the Bolshoi Theater confirmed that they had received a similar letter, and also said that Lunkina asked to let her go on vacation until the end of the season. In the Bolshoi Theater, the request was granted. The ballerina herself admitted that she asked for support in her native theater, wrote letters to Filin, but he did not answer. Meanwhile, the press secretary of the theater Katerina Novikova noticed that the artistic director treated the prima ballerina with love and respect and highly appreciated her. But Vladimir Vinokur, in an interview with the Russian News Service, stated the following: “Only the lazy one at the Bolshoi Theater did not know what kind of relationship her husband Moskalev had with Filin; Moskalev was constantly rude to Filin, threatened. (Later, when the media wrote that the parodist knew who might be behind the attack on Filin, he stated that he had not really said anything about the attack on the artistic director.)
Vladimir Vinokur, head of the Parody Theater named after himself, former adviser to the vice-president of the RSFSR for cultural affairs, does a lot of charity work and supports various cultural projects. In 2008, he created a foundation, which, according to his website, which is under development, "is active in the field of social and cultural policy aimed at spiritual and moral revival" and so on. A friend of Lev Leshchenko has a special relationship with ballet: Vinokur’s wife Tamara Pervakova is a former ballerina of the Stanislavsky and Nemirovich-Danchenko theater, daughter Anastasia is a ballet dancer of the Bolshoi Theater, accepted into the troupe in 2003 (performs, for example, the parts of Cinderella’s sister, Aya’s slave in "La Bayadère", Young Summer Woman in the ballet "Bright Stream").
Apparently, the passion for ballet brought Vinokur and Moskalev, who had previously acted as one of the producers of the Stars of the 21st Century concerts in Toronto, Paris and New York. Since 2010, with the participation of the Vinokur Foundation, the show has found a place on the stage of the State Kremlin Palace. In Moscow, the program acquired a new part of the name "Kremlin Gala" and became a really bright event in the ballet life of Moscow, more and more interesting every year. The best dancers from the Bavarian (one Lucia Lacarra is worth something), Stuttgart, London Royal and many other theaters come to the capital, and most importantly, the opuses of the best contemporary choreographers are shown in the Kremlin: from John Neumeier to Jean-Christophe Maillot.
Russian dancers are also powerfully represented - and Diana Vishneva, and Natalia Osipova, and Ivan Vasiliev were among the "stars of the XXI century." For the first two years, Svetlana Lunkina also appeared on the stage of the GKD, in 2010 she received the high-profile title of “ballerina of the decade” at the gala (albeit along with three other prima stars), but she did not perform in 2012. Anastasia Vinokur appears in the program from year to year, at the last concert the daughter of the parodist performed the number of Ksenia Vist “Holding her breath” with her partner Vladislav Marinov. Vinokur himself, who supports his daughter in every way, has repeatedly said that Anastasia is very artistic and charismatic; however, some critics believe that sometimes she even overacts.
Meanwhile, in 2012, Vladimir Vinokur stopped working with Moskalev on the Kremlin Gala project. But he began to work with Sergei Filin: last year, the artistic director of the Bolshoi Ballet Company directed the "star" concert.
In the summer of 2012, all the same Izvestia wrote that Anastasia Vinokur and Svetlana Lunkina could argue for the film role of Matilda Kshesinskaya, the favorite of Tsarevich Nicholas Alexandrovich (Nicholas II). Then Moskalev said that there were many contenders, the producers did not single out anyone, and one of the selection criteria was the skill of a dramatic game. Lunkina herself recently admitted that she never claimed the role of a ballerina in the film (the idea to shoot which, by the way, was born by Vinokur's wife). Thus, the prima ballerina rejected possible assumptions about the rivalry of the two girls because of the film role that quarreled with the producers.
And although the most detailed information about Svetlana Lunkina strangely comes from only one Russian publication, many Western media (and, of course, Canadian) wrote about threats to the world-famous ballerina: the news from Izvestia was picked up by The New York Times, The Los Angeles Times , BBC, Reuters, The Huffington Post and many others. The Star, which spoke to the couple, writes that in August 2012, the producer disagreed with Vinokur on how to distribute the film's $40 million budget. According to Moskalev, they began to threaten him and he went to the Canadian Kleinburg to his family, after which threats began to come to Svetlana; by the beginning of the theatrical season, the couple did not return to Moscow.
Kozhin and Vinokur financed "Matilda" from the black cash desk of "Gazprombank", and the director Alexei Uchitel carried the criminal cache of Putin's friends with bags.
Actions against the release of the film "Matilda" have gained in recent months such a scale that they began to resemble hidden advertising. In unison, monarchists and Orthodox activists protest the film, the Prosecutor General's Office checks the appeal of the deputy Natalia Poklonskaya for the presence in the film of episodes that offend religious feelings. Although, in reality, Yuri Chaika should have checked something else, namely, the sources of financing for Matilda. The Prosecutor General should probably be interested in the fact that the film was made with money withdrawn from an offshore controlled by Gazprombank in exchange for a bribe to the presidential affairs manager with the direct participation of Vladimir Vinokur, a near-Kremlin parodist.
Kozhin, Akimov and cash
“I came up with the name Matilda for the project,” admits entrepreneur and producer Vladislav Moskalev. He says that he started working on the film in 2010 with his friend Oleg Fraev. “Initially, the Matilda project was registered to the firm of Fraev’s daughter Art Mir [the founder is Tatyana Grigoryevna Fraeva]. On behalf of this company, I personally submitted documents to the Cinema Fund for partial financing of Matilda from the budget.
At the same time, Moskalev developed a second project - "Kremlin Gala" - this is no longer a feature film, but gala concerts with the participation of world ballet stars, which to this day are held annually in the Grand Kremlin Palace. (The theme of the ballet is well known to Moskalev, his wife is the prima ballerina of the Bolshoi Theater Svetlana Lunkina). Moskalev claims that his acquaintance Maria Zakharova, who now heads the press service of the Foreign Ministry, helped him come up with the name of the project “Kremlin Gala”.
Vladislav Moskalev and his wife, ballerina Svetlana Lunkina
“I lived in two countries and for this reason did not have my own companies in Russia, and everything was based on informal obligations,” Moskalev continues, “but in June 2011 my friend suddenly died of a heart attack, and Art Mir ceased to exist , two of my projects were up in the air. Then I myself handed them over to Vladimir Vinokur (with whom I already knew a little at that time), suggesting that he bring Matilda and the Kremlin Gala under the jurisdiction of his foundation (the former Foundation for Supporting the Parody Theater, now the Vladimir Vinokur Foundation for Supporting culture and arts). Vinokur owned this fund alone, signing all the documents. I was not included in the staff of the fund, I did not have the right to sign. But I had no choice - I would not have pulled out this project alone.
This is where things got interesting.
“Vinokur undertook to negotiate financing with Vladimir Kozhin (at that time - the Presidential Affairs Manager), whom he had known for fifteen years. We were in his office together. By the way, Kozhin's office is across the street from the Vinokur Theatre. Kozhin dialed a number in front of my eyes and gave the command "ten". After that, Gazprombank drove money to Cyprus, and offshore Tradescan Consultants Ltd (100% subsidiary of Gazprombank in Cyprus), in turn, transferred $10 million to the cinema. Another $10 million, as I understand it, was personally transferred by Andrey Akimov, president of Gazprombank, to the account of the Vinokur fund.
This is such a liquid common fund of the Kremlin. This is non-refundable money. According to the documents, there was a loan, but under the additional agreement on debt forgiveness, it turns out that the loan is not required to be repaid - but the Cypriot regulators have not paid attention to this.”
Vladimir Kozhin and Vladimir Vinokur
The Insider has at its disposal a $10 million loan contract between the Vladimir Vinokur Foundation and Tradescan Consultants Limited (with an additional "debt forgiveness" agreement), as well as Gazprombank's consolidated balance sheet as of January 1, 2012. Tradescan Consultants Limited is listed among hundreds of other offshore companies in the line “composition of participants in the consolidated banking group” (this offshore is still open today), it is also in the report for 2016. Moskalev assures that after he left the project, the budget increased to $40 million. These offshore schemes are needed due to the fact that if the bank had simply issued a loan through an office in Moscow, it might have had to be returned, Moskalev explains.
In an additional agreement to the loan agreement between Tradescan Consultants and the Vladimir Vinokur Foundation in 2011, indeed, it is said that the fund's debt is forgiven if by 2014 the fund does not begin to receive a certain amount of profit from the rental of the film "Matilda". Considering that by 2017 the film has not yet been released, this condition has long since come.
The Kremlin supply manager took bribes for hours
Kozhin also did not remain in the loser, says Moskalev: “As soon as we received the money, Vinokur said: “According to our rules, we must thank. Kozhin has a lot of money, that he should carry money! The former director of Vinokur, Mikhail Sheinin, sends Vinokur a photo of several watches as a gift to Kozhin. Vinokur shows me on his phone, on the big screen: “What do you think, what are they?” The price of the watch is from $250 to 400 thousand. I tell him: “You know him a long time ago, choose for yourself.” As a result, they bought the most expensive watch, for the same money for the project about Kshesinskaya. In front of my eyes, he carried them to Kozhin across the road. This is probably his 10th or 20th watch. It was a gift for helping to organize the Matilda project.
Moskalev also claims that Vinokur needed this money for personal purposes:
“Even before I met Vinokur, he took (on bail) a personal loan for $ 1.8 million. The purpose of the loan was to buy a building in the center of Moscow from the Moscow government for the Vladimir Vinokur Parody Theater. Vinokur bought this building for himself personally. For the reason that it was bought out for credit money, this building, of course, was pledged.
As soon as the first big money came for the Matilda project, Vinokur wanted to buy back the collateral from the bank, paying off the loan in full. He told me so: “Slava, I have a personal loan, I want to repay it with Matilda’s money and release it from bail.” “I will then return this money to the fund’s account,” Vinokur told me, ”says Moskalev.
Vinokur stole a building in the center of Moscow
How was he going to return? - continues Moskalev. - Very simple. He suddenly changed his mind about making a theater with a permanent stage (he always rented different stages) and decided to sell this building at the market price. He bought it from Moscow at a completely discounted price ($1.8 million), and was going to sell it for $10 million. That was the market price (no less) for this building. In fact, he stole a building in the center of Moscow.
In short, in November 2011, the first $10 million for the film Matilda came to the Vinokur Foundation, and already in January 2012 he fully repaid his personal loan with the money of Matilda. Six months after that, he announced that I stole that $1.8 million! At the same time, other debts were hung on me. ”
In 2012, Moskalev was withdrawn from the project. On November 1, 2012, the Investigation Department of the Main Directorate of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for Moscow opened a criminal case on the theft of 117 million rubles from the Vinokur Foundation, however, against an unidentified person. However, in fact, the investigation is underway against Moskalev: in 2013, Russian law enforcement agencies put him on the wanted list through Interpol on charges of “abuse of authority,” but Canada refused to extradite him.
According to Moskalev, "money laundering for cinema is a traditional practice." However, on the project of the film about Kshesinskaya, reasonable limits were exceeded.
“I took them out of Vinokur’s office on Slavyanskaya Square in a blue bag”
“Of this money, an advance was also given to Alexei Uchitel - three million for his company Rock and a million dollars in cash. He carried them out of Vinokur's office on Slavyanskaya Square in a blue bag in front of my eyes. I don't know why he needed cash, but of course it's convenient. However, instead of starting to shoot, he rejected one scenario after another and filmed a project with Channel One. As a result, the Vladimir Vinokur Foundation made a pre-trial claim against Alexei Uchitel. We wanted to remove the Teacher from the project, both Kozhin and Vinokur agreed. Vinokur has access to Putin himself, it would seem, much higher, there will be no problems.
But I did not take into account that the Teacher, it turns out, was making a movie about Valery Gergiev at that moment and became close to him. And Gergiev is closer to Putin than even Roldugin. Putin, for example, sent Gergiev to Great Britain to put in a good word before the Queen. In front of my eyes, Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin was at the reception to Gergiev. Gergiev accepted it around five in the morning, because he likes to work until seven in the morning ... In general, the Teacher complained to Gergiev that I would transfer the project to the Americans.
And without going into details, Gergiev called Putin or simply threatened that he would call. Then Kozhin already said: “I take back my words, return the Teacher. The Americans are taking over the project, and you know how much Putin hates the Americans.” Vinokur immediately took it under his visor, and I was squeezed out of the project.
Director Alexei Uchitel and Governor of St. Petersburg Georgy Poltavchenko on the set of Matilda
When asked why Kozhin manages Gazprombank's money so easily, Moskalev answers as follows:
“The decision to transfer money was made by Kozhin personally. And he personally gave the command for the transfer, since it was he who disposed of this offshore. How much money can be on this offshore if Kozhin easily gives a command to transfer $20 million, knowing full well that this money may never return? I think at least $2-3 billion. It is my deep conviction that this Cyprus offshore is one of the many offshores where the money of Putin and his inner circle (including Kozhin) is located, and there are hundreds of them in total. Each of Putin's closest friends (I think there are about 20 of them, and Roldugin is the smallest frontman among them) has his own quota in the common fund, which they can dispose of at their discretion. I am sure that all Gazprombank's offshore companies are part of the common fund, and Gazprombank's money is the main, although not the only part of the common fund.
Several sources previously involved in business dealings with Vladimir Putin's inner circle have confirmed that this overall asset control scheme is generally correct, although they have shied away from estimating the total amount of funds in this kind of offshore.
As previously reported by the Ruspres agency, the president's relatives also financed the production of the film Viy. In particular, money for the painting was given by a business partner of Roman Putin, the son of President Igor Putin's cousin.
Meanwhile, on the notorious Change.org website, there is a petition to ban the film "Matilda" and bring its creators to criminal liability due to the fact that in it "the role of Tsar Nicholas II was played by Lars Eidinger, a German actor who performed a pornography in 2012 role in Peter Greenaway's film. Interestingly, Gergiev also asked for it, or someone else?
Anastasia KirilenkoThe film by Alexei Uchitel "Matilda" about the connection between Nicholas II and the ballerina Kshesinskaya will be released only in October, but it has already become the brightest Russian film premiere of 2017. First, Orthodox activists, led by ex-prosecutor and MP Natalia Poklonskaya, demanded that the film be banned because of “insulting the feelings of believers,” while Putin’s press secretary Dmitry Peskov urged them to watch the film first. While the public is excited about the issue of coverage of the life of Nicholas II and his entourage, The Insider found out that "Matilda" gives a reason to talk about Vladimir Putin's entourage: as one of the co-authors of this project told the publication Vladislav Moskalev, the film was filmed with money withdrawn from an offshore controlled by Gazprombank in exchange for a bribe to the presidential affairs manager, and the parodist Vladimir Vinokur was a direct participant in these events.
“I came up with the name Matilda for the project,” admits entrepreneur and producer Vladislav Moskalev in a conversation with The Insider. He says that he started working on the film in 2010 with his friend Oleg Fraev. “Initially, the Matilda project (like my previous project “Kremlin Gala”) was registered to the firm of Fraev’s daughter Art Mir. On behalf of this company, I personally submitted documents to the Cinema Fund for partial financing of Matilda from the budget.
At the same time, he developed a second project - "Kremlin Gala" - this is no longer a feature film, but gala concerts with the participation of world ballet stars, which to this day are held annually in the Grand Kremlin Palace. (The theme of the ballet is well known to Moskalev, his wife is the prima ballerina of the Bolshoi Theater Svetlana Lunkina). Moskalev claims that his acquaintance, Maria Zakharova, who now heads the press service of the Foreign Ministry, helped him come up with the name of the project “Kremlin Gala”.
“I lived in two countries and for this reason did not have my own companies in Russia, and everything was based on informal obligations,” Moskalev continues, “but in June 2011 my friend suddenly died of a heart attack, and Art Mir ceased to exist , two of my projects were up in the air. Then I handed them over myself Vladimir Vinokura(with whom I was already a little familiar then), suggesting that he introduce Matilda and the Kremlin Gala under the jurisdiction of his foundation (the former Foundation for the Support of the Parody Theater, now the Vladimir Vinokur Foundation for the Support of Culture and Art). Vinokur owned this fund alone, signing all the documents. I was not included in the staff of the fund, I did not have the right to sign. But I had no choice - I would not have pulled out this project alone.
This is where things got interesting.
“Vinokur undertook to negotiate financing with Vladimir Kozhin(at that time - the manager of the affairs of the President), with whom he has known for fifteen years. We were in his office together. By the way, Kozhin's office is located across the street from the Vinokur Theater<адрес театра Винокура - Славянская площадь, 2/5 с.5, действительно, неподалеку от Управления делами президента - The Insider>. Kozhin dialed a number in front of my eyes and gave the command "ten". After that, Gazprombank drove money to Cyprus, and offshore Tradescan Consultants Ltd (100% subsidiary "Gazprombank" in Cyprus), in turn transferred $ 10 million to the cinema. Another $ 10 million, as far as I understand, he transferred personally Andrey Akimov, president of Gazprombank, to the account of the Vinokur fund.
This is such a liquid common fund of the Kremlin. This is non-refundable money. According to the documents, it was a loan, but according to the additional agreement on debt forgiveness, it turns out that the loan is not required to be repaid - but the Cypriot regulators have not paid attention to this.”
The Insider has at its disposal a $10 million loan contract between the Vladimir Vinokur Foundation and Tradescan Consultants Limited (with an additional debt forgiveness agreement), as well as Gazprombank’s consolidated balance sheet as of January 1, 2012. banking group” among hundreds of other offshores is Tradescan Consultants Limited (this offshore is still open today), it is also in the report for 2016. Moskalev assures that after he left the project, the budget increased to $40 million. These offshore schemes are needed due to the fact that if the bank had simply issued a loan through an office in Moscow, it might have had to be returned, Moskalev explains.
The Insider reviewed the supplementary agreement to the 2011 loan agreement between Tradescan Consultants and the Vladimir Vinokur Foundation. Indeed, it says that the fund's debt is forgiven if by 2014 the fund does not begin to receive a certain amount of profit from the rental of the film "Matilda". Considering that by 2017 the film had not even hit the screens, this condition had come a long time ago.
Kozhin also did not remain in the loser, says Moskalev:
“As soon as we received the money, Vinokur says: “According to our rules, we must thank. Kozhin has a lot of money, that he should carry money! The former director of Vinokur, Mikhail Sheinin, sends Vinokur a photo of several watches as a gift to Kozhin. Vinokur shows me on his phone, on the big screen: “What do you think, what are they?” The price of the watch is from $250 to 400 thousand. I tell him: “You know him a long time ago, choose for yourself.” As a result, they bought the most expensive watch, for the same money for the project about Kshesinskaya. In front of my eyes, he carried them to Kozhin across the road. This is probably his 10th or 20th watch. It was a gift for helping to organize the Matilda project.
He also claims that Vinokur needed this money for personal purposes:
“Even before I met Vinokur, he took (on bail) a personal loan from VTB for $ 1.8 million. The purpose of the loan was to buy a building in the center of Moscow from the Moscow government for the Vladimir Vinokur Parody Theater. Vinokur bought this building for himself personally. Due to the fact that it was bought out for credit money, this building, of course, was pledged to VTB.
As soon as the first big money came for the Matilda project, Vinokur wanted to buy back the collateral from the bank, paying off the loan in full. He told me so: “Slava, I have a personal loan at VTB Bank, I want to repay it with Matilda’s money and release it from bail.” “I will then return this money to the account of the fund,” Vinokur told me. How was he going to return? Very simple. He suddenly changed his mind about making a theater with a permanent stage (he always rented different stages) and decided to sell this building at the market price. He bought it from Moscow at a completely discounted price ($1.8 million), and was going to sell it for $10 million. That was the market price (no less) for this building. In fact, he stole a building in the center of Moscow.
In short, in November 2011, the Vinokur Foundation received the first $10 million for the film Matilda, and already in January 2012 he fully repaid his personal loan from VTB Bank. Money "Matilda". Six months after that, he announced that I stole that $1.8 million! At the same time, other debts were hung on me. ”
In 2012, Moskalev was withdrawn from the project. On November 1, 2012, the Investigation Department of the Main Directorate of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for Moscow opened a criminal case on the theft of 117 million rubles. from the Vinokur Foundation, however, in relation to an unidentified person. However, in fact, the investigation is underway against Moskalev: in 2013, Russian law enforcement agencies put him on the wanted list through Interpol on charges of “abuse of authority,” but Canada refused to extradite him.
According to Moskalev, "money laundering for cinema is a traditional practice." However, on the project of the film about Kshesinskaya, reasonable limits were exceeded.
“Of this money, an advance was also given to Alexei Uchitel - three million for his Rock company and a million dollars in cash. He carried them out of Vinokur's office on Slavyanskaya Square in a blue bag in front of my eyes. I don't know why he needed cash, but of course it's convenient. However, instead of starting to shoot, he rejected one scenario after another and filmed a project with Channel One. As a result, the Vladimir Vinokur Foundation made a pre-trial claim against Alexei Uchitel. We wanted to remove the Teacher from the project, both Kozhin and Vinokur agreed. Vinokur has access to Putin himself, it would seem, much higher, there will be no problems.
But I did not take into account that the Teacher, it turns out, was at that moment making a movie about Gergiev and got close to him. And Gergiev is closer to Putin than even Roldugin. Putin, for example, sent Gergiev to Great Britain to put in a good word before the Queen. Before my eyes, the Minister of Finance Kudrin stood at the reception to Gergiev. Gergiev accepted it around five in the morning, because he likes to work until seven in the morning ... In general, the Teacher complained to Gergiev that I would transfer the project to the Americans.
And without going into details, Gergiev called Putin or simply threatened that he would call. Then Kozhin already said: “I take back my words, return the Teacher. The Americans are taking over the project, and you know how much Putin hates the Americans.” Vinokur immediately took it under his visor, and I was squeezed out of the project.
When asked why Kozhin manages Gazprombank's money so easily, Moskalev answers as follows:
“The decision to transfer money was made by Kozhin personally. And he personally gave the command for the transfer, since it was he who disposed of this offshore. How much money can be on this offshore if Kozhin easily gives a command to transfer $20 million, knowing full well that this money may never return? I think, at least $2-3 billion. It is my deep conviction that this Cyprus offshore is one of the many offshores that contain the money of Putin and his closest associates (including Kozhin), and there are hundreds of them in total. Each of Putin's closest friends (I think there are about 20 of them, and Roldugin is the smallest frontman among them) has his own quota in the common fund, which they can dispose of at their discretion.
I am sure that all Gazprombank's offshore companies are part of the common fund, and Gazprombank's money is the main, although not the only part of the common fund.
Two more The Insider interlocutors, who were previously involved in business relations with Vladimir Putin's inner circle, confirmed that this scheme for controlling general assets is generally correct, although they avoided estimating the total amount of funds in such offshores.
The Insider also reached out to all those involved in this story with a request for comment. Vladimir Vinokur, hearing the name of Moskalev, replied: “You need to call the law enforcement agencies. This person is wanted by Interpol, so you don’t even have to call me, ”and hung up the call. Kozhin's office declined to comment. The ex-prosecutor and deputy Poklonskaya, for her part, requested paper copies of documents, including those with a “non-repayable” loan (the editors complied with her request and handed over the documents, what the deputy is going to do with them is still unknown). Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova, in turn, confirmed that she knew Vladislav Moskalev, specifying that ex-Foreign Minister Andrei Kozyrev introduced them in New York. She, however, did not take sides in the conflict, noting that she was very sorry that the good people involved in the Matilda project quarreled. Conductor Valery Gergiev could not be contacted at the time of The Insider's publication.
Prima ballerina of the Bolshoi Theater, Honored Artist of Russia Svetlana Lunkina fears for herself and her family if she returns to Russia. The artist, who has been in Canada for about six months, told Izvestia about this, explaining that she was faced with blackmail, threats and hacking of her personal Internet space.
The origins of this tangled story lead to a film about Matilda Kshesinskaya, on the project of which Lunkina's husband, producer Vladislav Moskalev and the famous humorist, head of the Parody Theater and the foundation of his own name in support of culture and art Vladimir Vinokur worked together. Last year, serious differences of opinion arose between the partners, which escalated into a conflict.
Alexey Uchitel, who was invited to direct the film, turned down several scripts - first by Andrey Gelasimov, then by Paul Schroeder. Then Mr. Moskalev offered to replace Alexei Uchitel with another director, but met resistance from his partner. According to Moskalev, Vladimir Vinokur was ready to sacrifice the international distribution of the picture, but keep the Teacher (the latter confirmed to Izvestia that plans to make a film about Kshesinskaya were “still in force”).
Soon, Lunkina's husband was withdrawn from the project. In September, the lawyers of the Vinokur Foundation presented him with financial claims for $3.7 million, which Mr. Moskalev categorically rejected and continues to reject now.
The deputy director of the Vinokur Foundation, Mikhail Sheinin, delivered a written ultimatum to Vladislav Moskalev (available to Izvestia): if the money is not sent within two days, the foundation will launch an information attack. Copies of the fund's statements of claim will be sent not only to the Ministry of Internal Affairs and the Prosecutor General's Office, but also to the largest theaters in the world: the Bolshoi, the Mariinsky, the American Ballet Theatre, the Paris Ballet, the Canadian Opera and others.
Vinokur's lawyers turned to State Duma deputy Pyotr Romanov, who sent official appeals to the Prosecutor General and the Minister of Internal Affairs of Russia (Izvestia has at its disposal). Svetlana Lunkina is not mentioned in these letters. A slightly different text was sent to the theaters, indicating that Moskalev in Canada legalized part of the stolen funds “with the help of his wife.”
The press secretary of the Bolshoi Theater Ekaterina Novikova confirmed to Izvestia the receipt of such a letter sent from an anonymous address.
To the question of Izvestia about the connection between the financial activities of Moskalev and musical theaters, Mikhail Sheinin answered:
- We have no claims against Lunkina. As for the letters sent to the theatres, I don't know what they are talking about.
Vladimir Vinokur himself is aware of the letters to the theaters: the connection between Vladislav Moskalev and the professional activities of Svetlana Lunkina, according to him, is “very simple”, but Mr. Vinokur could not explain it to Izvestia, saying literally the following:
- No one sent her (Svetlana Lunkina. - Izvestia) to Canada, no one threatened her. But the fact is that she left and does not return, saying that she is being threatened.
On November 1, 2012, the Investigation Department of the Main Directorate of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for Moscow opened a criminal case on embezzlement of funds from the Vinokur Foundation, while the name of the attacker was not named.
The document initiating the case, in particular, read (the punctuation of the original source was retained): “in a place not established by the investigation, an unidentified person, acting out of mercenary motives, in order to embezzle funds on an especially large scale, illegally through the Bank-Client remote banking system” organized the transfer of funds from the settlement account of the V. Vinokur Foundation in support of culture and art.
Svetlana Lunkina is convinced that if she returns to Moscow, her family will face provocations and a possible arrest. According to the ballerina, she wrote to the Bolshoi Theater asking for support. In the theater, her letters are commented differently.
“Svetlana Lunkina turned to the management with a request to release her from work for the season, since she should be in Canada,” Ekaterina Novikova told Izvestia. — This request was granted. We don't know legally why she's not coming back. If this is related to the activities of her husband, I do not see how the theater can affect this. Anna Pavlova also left Russia because of her husband's activities.
- The theater cannot guarantee Svetlana's safety - this is obvious. The theater simply does not have such resources,” the press secretary concluded.
Lunkina herself explains the inaction of the Bolshoi for other reasons.
- I really wanted to return and still want to, but recently I found out that my artistic director does not want this. Sergei Filin said to the troupe artists: "Lunkina will not return here anymore." I was told about this by friends who work in the theater, who write to me, sympathize, support me, says the ballerina.
Vladislav Moskalev believes that Sergei Filin's reaction was due to his contacts with Vladimir Vinokur: since the fall of 2012, Filin has been the director of the famous Kremlin Gala project owned by the Vinokur Foundation (the head of the fund confirmed to Izvestia the fact of cooperation with Filin).
Sergei Filin was unavailable for comment on Monday - he underwent a third eye operation after being subjected to a chemical attack. The press secretary of the Bolshoi Theater said that the artistic director always spoke highly of Lunkina as a ballerina.
“Sergei treated Svetlana with great respect and love and insisted on her participation in performances,” added Ekaterina Novikova.
Vladimir Vinokur said that the investigation against Moskalev continues. Lawyers for Moskalev and Lunkina, in turn, are preparing documents for filing a lawsuit about blackmail and threats from the Vinokur Foundation. The ballerina told Izvestia that she wants to "compete for the Bolshoi Theater" before thinking about a career with other ballet companies in the world.
Dedicated to the triumphal holding of the "Kremlin Gala Ballet Stars of the 21st Century".
I don’t quite understand what made the journalist, who was once known for his knowledge, distort the facts in such a way, and the Ekho Moskvy portal published this deliberately biased material on its pages. However, since this happened, I consider it necessary to shed light on the details of the situation described in the article.
Related materials
The published material fully reflects the point of view of Solomon Tenser, my former partner in organizing a number of ballet events.
For a number of reasons (which I prefer not to mention), Mr. Tenser's participation in the organization of the "Kremlin Gala Stars of the Ballet of the 21st Century" did not take place, and I perfectly understand that the feelings of my former partner were hurt. But is it necessary in such cases to resort to juggling and distortion of facts? The question is rhetorical.
In reality, the situation looks like this: the name of the event "Kremlin Gala Ballet Stars of the 21st Century" is completely unique and does not violate anyone's rights.
If this were not the case, then we would have already received a lawsuit and would easily prove our case in court - but, of course, no real lawsuits were filed, although there was plenty of time (it was known about the preparation of the event since the beginning of the year) .
The "stolen biography" seems to refer to the history of the STARS OF THE 21ST CENTURY gala series.
It turns out that I stole a biography from myself - after all, it was your obedient servant who organized these concerts in New York, Paris and Toronto, which can be easily verified by looking at the relevant posters and booklets). It was I who attracted funding, promoted and conducted all these events as an organizer or lead co-organizer. It is possible that Mr. Tenser, also being a co-organizer, believes that his contribution to the organization exceeds mine and he has the right to make claims, but, to be honest, I see no reason for this (this is a purely ethical assessment, and there is no legal component here at all).
Moreover, if Mr. Tenser considers himself the owner of the rights to STARS OF THE 21ST CENTURY, then why isn't he doing it?
In 2010 and 2011, the ballet gala "STARS OF THE 21ST CENTURY" was not held in New York - only because I considered it more important for me to hold the event not in New York, but in Moscow, and already with a different name "Stars ballet of the 21st century” (by the way, Mr. Tenser cannot but know this, because he acted as one of the co-organizers of the gala in 2010, and the main organizers, together with me, were the ArtOtdel and ArtMir companies). The success of these events was overwhelming!
Here is what can be said about the historical aspect of the event.
I really do not want to look immodest, but I think no one will object to the fact that the history of the ballet galas “Kremlin Gala” Ballet Stars XX! century”, “Stars of the Ballet of the 21st Century” and “STARS OF THE 21ST CENTURY” do not exist without Vladislav Moskalev, and Mikhail Berman’s article is based solely on emotions and fraud that are not supported by facts.
